Seriously speaking:
1) Nobody was arrested thus far.
2) The Moscow rally was held not where it was sanctioned but in a completely different place despite official warnings. So police actions here were perfectly legal.
3) The scale of protest actions was pretty moderate compared with previous opposition rallies. Only an unusually large number of teenagers and school pupils was a special thing.

Seriously speaking:
1) Nobody was arrested thus far.
2) The Moscow rally was held not where it was sanctioned but in a completely different place despite official warnings. So police actions here were perfectly legal.
3) The scale of protest actions was pretty moderate compared with previous opposition rallies. Only an unusually large number of teenagers and school pupils was a special thing.

I agree with points 1 and 2 but disagree with #3 in regard to St. Petesburg: I estimated a crowd of about 5-6 thousand people, which is just a thousand less than the protest in December 2011. This was the largest public protest in the city in the last 6 years, and considering it was practically not advertised anywhere and the reasons for massive people's indignation were far more fickle than the Putin-Medvedev in-your-face pre-arranged "state post swap", I would say there are a lot of unusual aspects to this protest which require close scrutiny. The high turnout of schoolkids was the most unusual thing. For a very long time politics at schools was for nerds and outsiders at best, and suddenly it became sort of fashionable. Either Navalny found a way to advertise his rally via social networks used by schoolkids and succeeded where everyone before him failed, namely at attracting younger audiences, or this is a sympthom of some deeper changes in the Russian society, that the children feel "sanctioned" by the society to protest and they feel they are on the "right side of history". I can relate to that, having taken part in protests at an early age, and if this turns out to be true, we're in for a bumpy road. I was dismayed by the characteristically philistine reaction of hardcore pro-Putin people, dismissing kids' participation and saying something like "oh they have nothing to do", "they were promised candies and pocket change", etc. This may potentially become a quite serious problem and silence on the part of the authorities is not a good answer.

At least, in Moscow the number of protesters seem to be smaller than those involved in Bolotnaya rallies.

Quote:

I was dismayed by the characteristically philistine reaction of hardcore pro-Putin people, dismissing kids' participation and saying something like "oh they have nothing to do", "they were promised candies and pocket change", etc

I would say the situation was just asking for some acid jokes. Also great stuff for counter-propaganda. Guess we will see a lot of "pimply schoolboys", "better find a girlfriend" and similar stuff.

At least, in Moscow the number of protesters seem to be smaller than those involved in Bolotnaya rallies.

I would say the situation was just asking for some acid jokes. Also great stuff for counter-propaganda. Guess we will see a lot of "pimply schoolboys", "better find a girlfriend" and similar stuff.

The problem is that almost no one tries to understand what motivates them and what their grievances are, and what suddenly made politics popular for them. At least a few years ago they would've been embarrassed to even confess anyone they went to a political rally, being afraid of becoming nerds or weirdos in the eyes of their peers. And yeah, it's the same old adage of "these good-for-nothing students stirring trouble" Tsar's regime supporters said before the revolution, smacking their fat lips in disgust. This level of political analysis didn't take them too far as we all know.

I find an eerie parallel with American Democrats/Liberals here, who just shut their minds tight after Trump's victory, refusing to believe someone can actually have legitimate interests laying outside the Liberal agenda, preferring to blame Russia and calling Trump supporters just "dumb people who don't know crap". Of course, there appeared a number of sober and sane articles in their media outlets which tried to honestly analyse Trump's victory, but they just sank without much trace in a sea of biased and myopic BS. This is what I see in many Russian pro-government publications as well.

__________________
Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

I find an eerie parallel with American Democrats/Liberals here, who just shut their minds tight after Trump's victory, refusing to believe someone can actually have legitimate interests laying outside the Liberal agenda, preferring to blame Russia and calling Trump supporters just "dumb people who don't know crap".

There is one small difference: Navalny didn't win any elections thus far. Only after several years those kids will be able to go to polling stations and still they will be a small minority. It will take 10-15 years for this generation to become important politically. Generally speaking the problem of Russian liberal opposition is that they desperate generating much ado with their public rallies they were unable to formulate a coherent political program and with some exceptions demonstrated pathetic results at elections. If they will be able to overcome these problems is a big "?". Certainly Navalny achieved an unequivocal success in developing the network of regional organizations and becoming an uncontested opposition leader, but that is just a part of his challenges.
I find the common reaction to the event exaggerated, that is probably due to a lack of large events recently. A generally sober assessment here:https://www.stratfor.com/geopolitica...mpaign=article